Yeah the Me-262 was the King of the Skies for all of 10 hours...Then the engines flamed out...
Worst aircraft of WW2?
- Thread starter cheddar cheese
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Wespe
Airman 1st Class
Jeeeeee,
You think he is going to give you some Belgium chocolate for that
Was that a very sorry attempt at humor Wespe? Because it was not funny? Dont piss me off tonight Wespe.
Wespe
Airman 1st Class
Yep,
thats exactly the 10 hours I am talking about 8) , unfortunatly they didn't have 3000 planes at 10 hours.
Don't bring up the pilot and fuel shortage now.
thanks
Why not, it was the truth. Is the truth desturbing you. Does the truth hurt.
History is history, I am sorry if you dont want to realize what the truth is.
History is history, I am sorry if you dont want to realize what the truth is.
Jabo
Banned
Hallo Wespe/Landsmann
come on, I agree that the 262 was a fantastic fighter (when it was able to fly) fact is the bird was not performing as a whole due to its engines. So the impact it was supposed to have never came.
So you also knowing that, you should be able to agree, that due to this it cant be nominated as "the" best aircraft of WWII right ?
Jabo
Okay Jabo or should I say Wespe. What would you rather be called? Wespe or Jabo? You tripped the multiple login alarm. What game are you trying to play? You know we dont like people being dishonest with others around here. Even though this place is laid back we take it serious.
Oh damn someone else trying to come here and play games or BS us. He had better explain fast before Dan sees this.
He has 15 minutes...actually 10 now...
Lay the beat down Chris, kick some butt.
Swing Batta Batta Swing!!! He is out of here.
You the man Chris.
At times you come off as this nice quite guy but when you get ticked (takes more to tick you off then Dan) you play hard ball.
No games or BS here newbies. You want to try and snow people then go some place else. Way to go Chris
Soundbreaker Welch?
Tech Sergeant
Worst aircraft of WWII: The unfixable ones. Keep tinkering with them and they never run. Might as well get rid of them but you keep on trying, hoping it will work.
I guess all kinds of aircraft suffer from this problem.
I guess all kinds of aircraft suffer from this problem.
Looks sometimes define performance, in aviation at least and that one really sets the bar for being a bad aircraft :
Here is a quote from Jerzy B. Cynks's Polish Aircraft 1893-1939:
"To save time and expense the Department of Aeronautics insisted that conversion to the Pegasus engines should be carried out with the minimum of alteration. Initial investigations, conducted by P.Z.L stress specialists, revealed that this could only be done at the expense of a reduction in the safety factor, and the Department accepted the risk. Consequently, in spite of an increase in power of over 50 per cent, the structure was not strengthened except for the gluing of pieces of thicker plywood into some sections of wing covering...Superficial checks did not indicate any structural damage, but the spars were not examined properly...On [November 7, 1936], the aircraft...took off on a demonstration flight and then disintegrated in the air over Okecie aerodrome, killing the entire crew. Comprehensive static tests and thorough investigations were ordered to determine the causes of the crash, and those confirmed the general weakness of the wing and also revealed a considerable disparity between the theoretical and actual strength of the casein glue which reduced the already low safety factor even further.
"The undercarriage units imported from France had faulty locking mechanisms and the electric engines proved too weak to raise the wheels properly...The mechanical locking device added by L.W.S. did little to resolve the problem, and the undercarriages of most Zubrs were eventually locked permanently in the down position."
The Zubr entered service in the summer of 1939, but due to their increased weight, they were practically useless. Cynk notes, "The aircraft could not be operated at full loaded weight from temporary landing fields, and in a lightly loaded condition could carry virtually no bombs and were therefore useless for combat."
Only 16 were built, as Poland got attacked by Germany, the Zubrs only served as decoys!
At least for consolation, one had been used by the Luftwaffe as an unarmed trainer.
Here is a quote from Jerzy B. Cynks's Polish Aircraft 1893-1939:
"To save time and expense the Department of Aeronautics insisted that conversion to the Pegasus engines should be carried out with the minimum of alteration. Initial investigations, conducted by P.Z.L stress specialists, revealed that this could only be done at the expense of a reduction in the safety factor, and the Department accepted the risk. Consequently, in spite of an increase in power of over 50 per cent, the structure was not strengthened except for the gluing of pieces of thicker plywood into some sections of wing covering...Superficial checks did not indicate any structural damage, but the spars were not examined properly...On [November 7, 1936], the aircraft...took off on a demonstration flight and then disintegrated in the air over Okecie aerodrome, killing the entire crew. Comprehensive static tests and thorough investigations were ordered to determine the causes of the crash, and those confirmed the general weakness of the wing and also revealed a considerable disparity between the theoretical and actual strength of the casein glue which reduced the already low safety factor even further.
"The undercarriage units imported from France had faulty locking mechanisms and the electric engines proved too weak to raise the wheels properly...The mechanical locking device added by L.W.S. did little to resolve the problem, and the undercarriages of most Zubrs were eventually locked permanently in the down position."
The Zubr entered service in the summer of 1939, but due to their increased weight, they were practically useless. Cynk notes, "The aircraft could not be operated at full loaded weight from temporary landing fields, and in a lightly loaded condition could carry virtually no bombs and were therefore useless for combat."
Only 16 were built, as Poland got attacked by Germany, the Zubrs only served as decoys!
At least for consolation, one had been used by the Luftwaffe as an unarmed trainer.
Quote from earlier..
"the 1st of the British 4-engined heavies it was designed with a short wingspan to fit into existing hangers, and carried all the shortcomings of that decision with it for its like".
Mason in 'The British Bomber since 1914', amazingly points out that...
"A thorough search among design drawings of all Service hangers in use during the 1930s has disclosed none in which the door width was 100 ft."
Most hangers were a "Type C".. with a "door aperture width of 126 feet".
Yet the Stirling specification imposed a wing span limitation of 100 feet..'to fit in existing hangers'.
At the time of its conception it was confidently expected to win the war. (Gunston)
"the 1st of the British 4-engined heavies it was designed with a short wingspan to fit into existing hangers, and carried all the shortcomings of that decision with it for its like".
Mason in 'The British Bomber since 1914', amazingly points out that...
"A thorough search among design drawings of all Service hangers in use during the 1930s has disclosed none in which the door width was 100 ft."
Most hangers were a "Type C".. with a "door aperture width of 126 feet".
Yet the Stirling specification imposed a wing span limitation of 100 feet..'to fit in existing hangers'.
At the time of its conception it was confidently expected to win the war. (Gunston)
Trautloft
Airman
this wespe guy forgot the meteors great role in destroying v1's
If the total V-I kills by the Meteor of 13 is "great", how would you describe the Tempest's 638 kills?
Trautloft
Airman
its role weren't important bcs of the numbers,which are,compared to the tempest's low indeed,but because the RAF had the source, he could allow himself this 'luxury act' to have a jet-engined squad only to pick the lame attempt of v1's.
also,the possibility to use them against the Me-262 (in case the best piston-engined fail,this worry wasnt necessary tho). to be honest,i think the messer would be victorious on a 1on1.
still,my point been defending the meteor,and refuse it as 'worst'. i told already,il2,explained aswell on page 43 here
also,the possibility to use them against the Me-262 (in case the best piston-engined fail,this worry wasnt necessary tho). to be honest,i think the messer would be victorious on a 1on1.
still,my point been defending the meteor,and refuse it as 'worst'. i told already,il2,explained aswell on page 43 here
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
